Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

House OKs smoking ban

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 3 2007 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Actually the whole state of Ohio is now non-smoking. Sorry had to correct you.

Through my own non-scientific observation the only truely harmful effect of second-hand smoke is that it causes delusions of grandur in some people.

Many years and billions of dollars have been spent in anti-smoking campaigns, education and legislation. Now, I never really believed there was much to the whole chemtrail business. But I have noticed that there are more reports in states that have anti-smoking legislation and lowered smoking populations.

Why is it again that the government doesn't want you to smoke? Health? Can't be tax reasons as Ohio has scrambled to raise sales taxes and even make labor taxable as the smoking population declined.

Nah, just keep on believing hat they tell you. Smoking is evil, illegal aliens are good. Islamic Terrorists are bad, overthrowing a government with no clear plans of how to instill a new one is good.

But while you are voting in all these new laws, be sure to vote with consideration of all angles. I know several businesses that will be closing from Ohio's anti-smoking laws. Funny how the VFW was all for the law until they found out that it effected them too. They even went to Columbus to fight it. Columbus lifted their finger and said screw you vets, the law is the law.


Oh, and if you go watch the Reds play in Cincinnati, you can not smoke anywhere in the open air stadium. If you step out to grab a smoke, they will not let you back in.

The law is now in full enforcement and will be enforced so says the state. Yet police are not permitted to arrest illegals unless commiting another crime.

But that is okay...anyone that feels empowered enough to act like a jerk and give a hard time while I am smoking a cigarette outdoor will be politely reminded that I am aware of the laws and that Ohio is also a concealed carry state as well. I will then ask them which law is more important for them to be aware of at this particular moment.



[edit on 3-5-2007 by Ahabstar]




posted on May, 3 2007 @ 03:52 AM
link   
I lived in a smoker house for much of my younger life. All of my grandparents smoked. My mother did not smoke but has several types of breathing problems. Since I left that environment my health increased 100%. Sadly, I ended up never going back to my grandparents home because of the smoke that filled their home. There could be 5 or 6 people smoking in the same room there and it was killing me. My mom lived with it for about 20 years. She is now in her 50's and is still feeling the effects.




Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke. Secondhand smoke contains hundreds of chemicals known to be toxic or carcinogenic, including formaldehyde, benzene, vinyl chloride, arsenic ammonia and hydrogen cyanide.

Secondhand smoke is especially harmful to young children. Secondhand smoke is responsible for between 150,000 and 300,000 lower respiratory tract infections in infants and children under 18 months of age, resulting in between 7,500 and 15,000 hospitalizations each year, and causes 1,900 to 2,700 sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) deaths in the United States annually.

Secondhand smoke can also aggravate symptoms in 400,000 to 1,000,000 children with asthma.

New research indicates that private research conducted by cigarette company Philip Morris in the 1980s showed that secondhand smoke was highly toxic, yet the company suppressed the finding during the next two decades.

Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet
www.lungusa.org...



Secondhand smoke is classified as a "known human carcinogen" (cancer-causing agent) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US National Toxicology Program, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization.

Tobacco smoke contains over 4,000 chemical compounds. More than 60 of these are known or suspected to cause cancer.

Pregnant women exposed to ETS are also at increased risk of having low birth weight babies.

American Cancer Society
www.cancer.org...


Health Effects of Second Hand Smoke Exposure
www.ocat.org...

CDC Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet
www.cdc.gov...

Children and Second Hand Smoke
www.entnet.org...

Passive Smoking Effects
en.wikipedia.org...


[edit on 3-5-2007 by zerotime]



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Inannamute
What most people don't seem to pay attention to is the fact that in general, a lot of the anti-smoking legislation is for those of us non-smokers who work in an environment such as a bar or restaurant.

Oh yes, we all have the right to 'choose' to work in a non-smoking environment.. that's if you can find a job in one..

Complaining customers generally doesn't do anything. It doesn't change policy, it just gets you moved around the restaurant, or occasionally some freebie or whatever..

The company still does what they wish to.





I was living in NY at the time that their smoking ban was passed. The shop I worked at had so many dangerous toxins in the air that any bird that happened to venture into the place....(the bay doors were usually left open to help air the place out)....were dead within 24 hours.

The shop that I am working at now flock much of their work....if you don't know what flock is, it's little tiny fibers of some kind of cloth material...real tiny fibers....the stuff gets in your hair, in your eyes, ears, nose, and I am certain it also gets into your lungs...

many, many occupations involve working with substances 100 times more dangerous than second hand smoke...if you want something printed, you're asking someone to play with some dangerous chemicals, if you want something machined out of a hunk of metal, you're asking someone to expose themselves to lead or some other heavy metal. society is asking many of it's members to damage themselves daily to provide you with all the neat little toys, tools and gadgets that you enjoy!!! I have two questions....

is it right for society to ask...coerce really, since these people have to do something to pay their overly high rent, medical bills, ect. ect. ect.....to work in these toxic atmospheres, but then turn around and say...well, please don't smoke here, there's this tiny, insignificant chance that you may harm someone with you smoke? isn't that just a little hypocritical. and well, if you want my opinion, what they are really saying is that they have the right to kill you off in a thousand and one ways....but well, don't smoke the cigarettes, eat the chips, ect.....because well, they'll hurt you!! we have the right to kill you, but you can't do anything to harm yourself!! bet ya didn't realize you were their slave, did ya??

my second question is this....why the heck should the resturant worker be protected from the small danger of shs, when they are allowing so many other workers to be exposed to much more dangerous substances??

and meanwhile.....
millions of people have been exposed to the same chemical that killed the pets because the same imported substances have been sold to pig and chicken farms.....

but, that's nothing to be concerned with...all's well.....after all money rules!!



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar

The shop that I am working at now flock much of their work....if you don't know what flock is, it's little tiny fibers of some kind of cloth material...real tiny fibers....the stuff gets in your hair, in your eyes, ears, nose, and I am certain it also gets into your lungs...

many, many occupations involve working with substances 100 times more dangerous than second hand smoke...if you want something printed, you're asking someone to play with some dangerous chemicals, if you want something machined out of a hunk of metal, you're asking someone to expose themselves to lead or some other heavy metal. society is asking many of it's members to damage themselves daily to provide you with all the neat little toys, tools and gadgets that you enjoy!!! I have two questions....


If you are working in any type of machine shop or chemical plant you should be wearing the proper safety equipment which includes protective eye wear, face shields, disposable gloves, and respirators. I work with some of the most dangerous toxic chemicals almost on a daily basis but I always have protection against toxic exposure. I work on and with people who design props for movies, theater, artists, designers, sculptures, etc. We make molds and cast products in different types of silicone, resins and liquid plastics. An Example: www.smooth-on.com...



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by zerotime
They ban smoking in Columbus OH and there are many more people at clubs and bars now. Smokers are a dying breed. I voted for the ban and I love it. No more smelling like a dirty ash tray or having to breath rotten smoke just because I wanted to go out for the night. The ban is working great. The vast majority of people I know are very happy with it. Our city overwhelmingly voted for it. 70% to 30%.



[edit on 3-5-2007 by zerotime]


I was in Columbus last year and never even noticed the smoking ban what I did notice was the large amount of younger women that were smoking in that part of the country
sure there were a few places that said no smoking but for the most part people were smoking.
Now granted I don't smoke anymore but you know how it goes if your parents tell you no when you run off to college then you are probably going to at least give it a try to prove them wrong or what ever other ill fated Ideas we all have or had at that age.

P.S. if you really want to save lives ban the automobile I mean after all if you stick three non smokers in a small space with 100 smokers they may get a sick stomach if however you stick the same amount of people in the same small area and run a car they will all be dead within 30-60 minutes so tell me which is more dangerous some people say this is unreasonable but I run a computer repair business and in the last 9 months I have driven less than 4000 miles. I load up my laptop in my backpack hop on the bike and go to my customer, sometimes I think customers use my services just cause it is so unique that I show up on a bike

Later GEO

[edit on 5/3/2007 by geocom]



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 09:22 AM
link   
I want to thank zerotime for having my back on this.

I just can't believe what has been posted here. There are so many of you that are defending big tobacco despite their continued effort to misinform and hide the truth about the dangers of smoking and second-hand smoke. Talk about a conspiracy, this one is huge and on-going and you are all supporting it.

I understand what you are saying about car exhaust, it's bad. If you don't like breathing it in wear a mask because you are not going to get rid of cars. Driving cars is not a choice for many people. You might live in a city with great public transportation but there are many places that walking or riding a bike is just not feasable. Smoking is also a choice but a coerced one. There is nothing good about inhaling smoke, be it from cars or cigs. It is bad for you, why can't everyone understand that.

Oh, and I would post some links to my facts and info but zerotime did a good job on that.



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   
As someone else said, if you work with toxic materials, you generally have protective gear, masks, suits, whatever.

If you work in a bar or a restaurant, there's no way to do that, it simply would not be allowed for me to wear a mask to work, for example.



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I think all of us smokers should stop just to put the burden of the taxes we pay on all the whiners.



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infoholic
I live in SW Kansas. There was recently a smoking ban in a town 30 miles east of where I live, of which I frequent that town quite often. I opposed their smoking ban (not in businesses nor within 50ft of entrances) due to the fact that "personal business owners" have lost a right to run their establishment how they see fit, regardless if they smoke or not.


I live in the same area, and look what the smoking ban has done to the downtown area of that town (Lawrence, KS?). Bars and resteraunts with large outside seating areas are booming in buisness (Replay, Louises Upstairs) while those without are turning into ghost towns (Bottleneck)... From what I understand about the politics involved there WAS some kind of consperacy involved where the city commisioner that swung the vote in favor of the ban was adamantly opposed to it all the way up until the day of the vote! And look what it has done to the landscape of downtown (the money cradle of the area for those of you who don't live nearby, cramed with restraunts and bars all within walking distance of one another), as I said earlier certain places were boosted by the ban (because they had places for people effected by it), others were hurt by it (because they didn't).

Me and the owner of a local restraunt were stumbling around a few years ago (more like 10) and stumbled into what is now the Granada, at that time it was the same sort of establishment (as it is today) but they had their own smoking ban (this was before the laws). We laughed at them and predicted that their buisness would never last... And it didn't. To bad for them they just didn't wait for the laws to catch up with them!



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 03:04 PM
link   
the respirators they provide, will not protect against the rayon fibers....is says so on the packaging, but nice try....

not to mention the fact that no matter how hard you try, you're gonna carry the crap with ya, and it's gonna be floating around you till you shower it off and ditch the clothes in a sealed container.. the inside of my car is covered with it. can't wear a respirator all the time.

read up on the damage the kodak plant in rochester does to the surrounding area's residents, as well as their employees...surprisingly enough, they were the first ones to get an exemption from the smoking ban from the state....
they probably didn't want to risk some smoker blowing the place up by throwing their cig in the wrong direction. I mean, they had designated smoking rooms throughout the plant, the only place that people could smoke, couldn't even smoke outside......nicely controlled...and the state thought they were gonna let them loose.



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
the respirators they provide, will not protect against the rayon fibers....is says so on the packaging, but nice try....

not to mention the fact that no matter how hard you try, you're gonna carry the crap with ya, and it's gonna be floating around you till you shower it off and ditch the clothes in a sealed container.. the inside of my car is covered with it. can't wear a respirator all the time.

read up on the damage the kodak plant in rochester does to the surrounding area's residents, as well as their employees...surprisingly enough, they were the first ones to get an exemption from the smoking ban from the state....
they probably didn't want to risk some smoker blowing the place up by throwing their cig in the wrong direction. I mean, they had designated smoking rooms throughout the plant, the only place that people could smoke, couldn't even smoke outside......nicely controlled...and the state thought they were gonna let them loose.


So your arguement is that since you work in a place were they do not provide you with the correct respirators or safety equipment and could get an illness or cancer that the rest of us should have to be okay with having smokers around us in public places? I have to say, I just do not understand what your employment problems have to do with the rest of us having to breath a smokers smoke.



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 04:07 AM
link   
the laws aren't geared for the rest of yous, at least the NY law isn't, and I get the impression that the law being dicussed is the same. they are geared towards the protection of the workers...
second hand smoke isn't dangerous enough for osha to take on.....it would make them hypocritical when it's compared to much of the stuff that they allow.

by the way, inadequate respirators isn't unique to my company...obviously. and my company never offered me one, or a facemask.....don't think they have any facemasks....and I never found out they had the respirators till I bought my own.


www.cdc.gov...

gee, here's a workplace where conditions have been proven to cause much the same health problems as shs smoke is said to cause.......
suggestions were made, but they were only suggestions. and the company had to come to them and ask for the help on those..
nothing was banned from the workplace.

the hospitality business deals with providing a pleasant environment for people to come into to enjoy a meal, or a drink, of a bed to sleep in....the key work is pleasant.
telling a bunch of smokers that they can't light up while they guzzle their beer isn't likely to provide too pleasant an environment I don't think...
and as the the owner is told to do this, the are free to spray whatever pretty smells the desire into the air, burn inscence if they wish, or introduce a wide range of substances into the atmosphere that is just a dangerous to human health as shs is. and the costumers are just about as equally free to do so.

heck they should ban the campfire kids from having campfires since those are more dangerous to human health than shs is!

the smoking bans are a shame, and when the people get rid of the shs, and find themselves still feeling ill, they will be out to ban something else they personally dislike, and then something else.....but the big sources for their problems, the car exhaust, workplace environments will never be changed adequately since well..the people like their neat toys, tools and the like and they can't be produced safely and still pull a profit.



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by RWPBR
I think all of us smokers should stop just to put the burden of the taxes we pay on all the whiners.


Good point about the taxes, I hadn't thought of that. In reality though, I seroiusly doubt that this ban will drastically reduce the number of smokers.



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
And for all those that are for this law, would you please stop driving your cars, you're polluting my air/lungs.


Not only that. Stop wearing perfume or cologne. My cigarette smoke will last about 2 minutes till it dissapates. How long do I have to sit there and endure your god awful perfume? BTW, perfume contains all the same nasty stuff as cigarette smoke. Where's the call for banning Calvin Klein?



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by scooler1
but here in IL 8 people die every day from second-hand smoke related illnesses.


I'd like to see you prove that as a cause of death. Because anything related to the lungs is now considered second hand smoke related. Give me a break. Back in the old days when people smoked more often and more people smoked, there was less lung cancer and emphysema. Care to explain that?



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   
The Anti-Smoking campaign is just another fine example of how science and politics do not mix, but no where near as bad as the global warming situation..

"Smoking causes cancer" is such a bold statement, considering there is actually no direct link proven between smoking and causing cancer. Sure, it may make you more prone to getting cancer, but i've yet to see definitive evidence showing that it actually causes the cancer..

I would be more worried about diesel fumes from lorries giving me cancer than cigarette smoke..



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   


Why should the non-smoker be the one to have to go to another place because we choose not to pollute our bodies with something that is clearly unhealthy?


why should the smoker have to be the one to go find another place? this law says there is no other place for us. if im a smoker and i want to open an establishment where people can come and smoke that should be ok. if you want to open an establishment where people dont smoke, then thats ok. instead you just say, "no you cant smoke anywhere i might ever go". thats not ok.
its about choice, you dont choose to smoke, well choose to go some place else. your telling me i dont have a choice.



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   
virginia recently had a law come up...at first, it was written so that it did away with the non-smoking sections in resturants and instead would have made it necessary for resturants to post signs "smoking permitted? or something to the like...well, by the time the governor got done with it.....it just about banned smoking everywhere....then it got shot down..

as it is now, there are resturants that allow smoking and those that do not. and there are some that do not that smokers will walk away from when they find out they don't allow smoking or if the resturant is good enough, they might endure the nicotine withdrawal long enough to enjoy the food. competition seems to be the key... but it seems to me, that just as many resturants are denying the smokers the right to light up as are denying the non smoker the right to smoke free air...so, well, seems all is fair in the long run, and like I said, the really good resturant will more than likely get both crowds...since there service will be worth the hardship of the smoking policy.

it would also seem to me that is the non smoking crowd was such a big majority, and all seemed to dislike shs that much, all those resturants that allow smoking would be in hard times, wouldn't they?

but that isn't the case. why?

maybe bacause the anti smoking crowd isn't really as big as they wish us to believe? or is it that their conviction isn't as strong as their desire to enjoy the food at every resturant in town?

it seems to me that if we had resturants with clearly stated smoking policies, a declining smoking population, resturant owners motivated by profits, and a little patience and conviction by the anti-smoking crowd would lead to the results that they desire. so why force the issue with government regulations that DO infringe upon the right of resturant owners to operate their businesses as they see fit?

by the way, if shs smoke is so dangerous, why doesn't the government do the right thing, and ban the sale of them?



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

"Smoking causes cancer" is such a bold statement, considering there is actually no direct link proven between smoking and causing cancer. Sure, it may make you more prone to getting cancer, but i've yet to see definitive evidence showing that it actually causes the cancer..

I would be more worried about diesel fumes from lorries giving me cancer than cigarette smoke..



You have got to be kidding me. Are you really that ignorant to believe that there is no relationship between smoking and cancer?

Here are just a few of the chemicals found in cigarettes:

Benzene (petrol additive)
A colourless cyclic hydrocarbon obtained from coal and petroleum, used as a solvent in fuel and in chemical manufacture - and contained in cigarette smoke. It is a known carcinogen and is associated with leukaemia.

Formaldehyde (embalming fluid)
A colourless liquid, highly poisonous, used to preserve dead bodies - also found in cigarette smoke. Known to cause cancer, respiratory, skin and gastrointestinal problems.

Ammonia (toilet cleaner)
Used as a flavouring, frees nicotine from tobacco turning it into a gas, found in dry cleaning fluids.

Acetone (nail polish remover)
Fragrant volatile liquid ketone, used as a solvent, for example, nail polish remover - found in cigarette smoke.

Tar
Particulate matter drawn into lungs when you inhale on a lighted cigarette. Once inhaled, smoke condenses and about 70 per cent of the tar in the smoke is deposited in the smoker's lungs.

Nicotine (insecticide/addictive drug)
One of the most addictive substances known to man, a powerful and fast-acting medical and non-medical poison. This is the chemical which causes addiction.

Carbon Monoxide (CO) (car exhaust fumes)
An odourless, tasteless and poisonous gas, rapidly fatal in large amounts - it's the same gas that comes out of car exhausts and is the main gas in cigarette smoke, formed when the cigarette is lit. Others you may recognize are :

Arsenic (rat poison), Hydrogen Cyanide (gas chamber poison)

source: Health Education Authority (UK) - Lifesaver


www.quit-smoking-stop.com...

Here is how smoking causes cancer in a nutshell:

-Smoke irritates the delicate tissues in the lungs

-Over time the irritation of the smoke causes the cells in the lung tissue to become hyperplastic, meaning the production of new cells to replace the damaged ones is increased

-The hyperplasia causes the lung cells to become dysplastic, meaning they start changing due to the chronic irritation from the smoke

-This leads to metaplasia, meaning that the lung cells change in response to the smoke irritation and become less specialized which makes it harder for the person to effectively transport oxygen to the blood.

-After years of constant insult to the lung tissue, it becomes weakened and the chemicals in the smoke bind to the DNA of the cells and damages it.

-The damage to the DNA results in cellular changes and eventually turns into a malignant cell.

-The offspring of the damaged cells go through further changes and becomes unstable.

-This accumulation of genetic changes causes the lung tissue to change into an invasive carcinoma.

Please let me know if any this is too hard for you to understand.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   
ummm...let's see...

Acetone, Benzene, Formaldehyde, Ammonia, Acetone, Carbon Monoxide, Arsenic.

okay let's see...

acetone....a friend at work got a heavy dose of this at work when the can of glue solvent was sprayed to close to him....the stuff is also in our solvents.....it's quite obvious to me that the stuff is allowed in industrial work places, and I don't see many women shunning it when they want their nail polish removed...

Benzene--glues, paints, furniture wax, and detergents, not to mention your local gas station...again.....ain't no one shunning the stuff when it's in these things.

Formaldehyde-- when I was a teenager, my mom bought a brand sp anking new trailer....and well, I was very much exposed to this then...again, it's in most new buildings, and in the industrial workplace.

Ammonia-- I got a feeling that most women get more exposure with this by cleaning their home!!

Carbon Monoxide--ain't even gonna comment on it.


Arsenic...ya, tobacco has a little arsenic in it, so doesn't most of the produce you eat. the farmlands were contaminated with it through pesticides!!

in conclusion...
it seems to me that we are being inudated by these substances in a variety of ways, and if you are working in certain occupations, you are expected to expose yourself to these, it's part of the job!! Probably moreso than through the casual contact with shs.

so, again I ask, so why should the federal government pass laws to protect food service workers from these substances when they are found in shs, while they are letting so much else go?






top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join